comment by Terminator1 (U1863)
posted 9 minutes ago
comment by jlou1978 (U15376)
posted 10 minutes ago
comment by 19th title coming soon. (U12879)
posted 1 hour, 22 minutes ago
yeah, let's protest about climate change in the middle of London, bringing all that traffic to a standstill.
cos all those stationary cars belching out co2 is just so great for the environment.
bloody stupid hypocritical tw@ts the lot of them.
and not one single one of them is 'saving the earth'. the earth has been much hotter than this, with higher co2 levels, many times before now. and will be again. the earth will be fine. it'll recover and continue it's cyclical processes just as it has before.
i'm not a climate change denier, i'm not disagreeing we're now having an adverse affect on the climate. just the scale of the outcome.
we might save ourselves, and some other species, till the next hot age, or the next ice age, and then the cycle will repeat.
anyone who thinks we can either 'save' or 'destroy' the planet has an overinflated sense of mankinds importance or abilities.
want to save mankind, and ensure there's enough resources for everyone? simple. kill 75% of the human population and then enact a strictly enforced 1 child born per adult policy. problem solved in perpetuity.
any protester unwilling to do that is an hypocrite.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What a load of total b0ll0x.🤣🤣🤣
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So what was the cause of the last dramatic increase in global temperatures? Cavemen flying jumbo jets?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
sunspots
comment by Terminator1 (U1863)
posted 28 minutes ago
comment by jlou1978 (U15376)
posted 10 minutes ago
comment by 19th title coming soon. (U12879)
posted 1 hour, 22 minutes ago
yeah, let's protest about climate change in the middle of London, bringing all that traffic to a standstill.
cos all those stationary cars belching out co2 is just so great for the environment.
bloody stupid hypocritical tw@ts the lot of them.
and not one single one of them is 'saving the earth'. the earth has been much hotter than this, with higher co2 levels, many times before now. and will be again. the earth will be fine. it'll recover and continue it's cyclical processes just as it has before.
i'm not a climate change denier, i'm not disagreeing we're now having an adverse affect on the climate. just the scale of the outcome.
we might save ourselves, and some other species, till the next hot age, or the next ice age, and then the cycle will repeat.
anyone who thinks we can either 'save' or 'destroy' the planet has an overinflated sense of mankinds importance or abilities.
want to save mankind, and ensure there's enough resources for everyone? simple. kill 75% of the human population and then enact a strictly enforced 1 child born per adult policy. problem solved in perpetuity.
any protester unwilling to do that is an hypocrite.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What a load of total b0ll0x.🤣🤣🤣
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So what was the cause of the last dramatic increase in global temperatures? Cavemen flying jumbo jets?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ancient Aliens racing round the skies with their then primitive combustible fuel based flying dragons.
Or inconsiderate dinosaurs farting methane into the atmosphere.
comment by Terminator1 (U1863)
posted 9 minutes ago
comment by jlou1978 (U15376)
posted 10 minutes ago
comment by 19th title coming soon. (U12879)
posted 1 hour, 22 minutes ago
yeah, let's protest about climate change in the middle of London, bringing all that traffic to a standstill.
cos all those stationary cars belching out co2 is just so great for the environment.
bloody stupid hypocritical tw@ts the lot of them.
and not one single one of them is 'saving the earth'. the earth has been much hotter than this, with higher co2 levels, many times before now. and will be again. the earth will be fine. it'll recover and continue it's cyclical processes just as it has before.
i'm not a climate change denier, i'm not disagreeing we're now having an adverse affect on the climate. just the scale of the outcome.
we might save ourselves, and some other species, till the next hot age, or the next ice age, and then the cycle will repeat.
anyone who thinks we can either 'save' or 'destroy' the planet has an overinflated sense of mankinds importance or abilities.
want to save mankind, and ensure there's enough resources for everyone? simple. kill 75% of the human population and then enact a strictly enforced 1 child born per adult policy. problem solved in perpetuity.
any protester unwilling to do that is an hypocrite.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What a load of total b0ll0x.🤣🤣🤣
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So what was the cause of the last dramatic increase in global temperatures? Cavemen flying jumbo jets?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We are talking about direct external impact over the last 50 years, which have been more impactful than previous millenier in terms of rising temperature.
You are talking about a completely different issue.
by 19th title coming soon. (U12879)
posted 2 hours, 43 minutes ago
yeah, let's protest about climate change in the middle of London, bringing all that traffic to a standstill.
cos all those stationary cars belching out co2 is just so great for the environment.
bloody stupid hypocritical tw@ts the lot of them.
and not one single one of them is 'saving the earth'. the earth has been much hotter than this, with higher co2 levels, many times before now. and will be again. the earth will be fine. it'll recover and continue it's cyclical processes just as it has before.
i'm not a climate change denier, i'm not disagreeing we're now having an adverse affect on the climate. just the scale of the outcome.
we might save ourselves, and some other species, till the next hot age, or the next ice age, and then the cycle will repeat.
anyone who thinks we can either 'save' or 'destroy' the planet has an overinflated sense of mankinds importance or abilities.
want to save mankind, and ensure there's enough resources for everyone? simple. kill 75% of the human population and then enact a strictly enforced 1 child born per adult policy. problem solved in perpetuity.
any protester unwilling to do that is an hypocrite.
____________________________________
I really hope you don't believe that nonsense.
The planet is in trouble, the seas, the air, and the land, which doesn't leave much else.
There are a lot of hypocrites on both sides, but it doesn't change what is happening.
I try to listen to people who do know, because I don't know it myself.
But when Sir David Attenborough tells me it's happening I tend to trust him.
When Donald Trump says it's not my trust is a little less.
hope I don't believe what? that we're causing problems? nowhere in my post have I denied we're causing problems.
do I believe we're risking the lives of most of the live on the planet, yes.
do I believe we're destroying the planet. no. not even close.
it's sheer arrogance to think we're even close to having that sort of power.
the planet is NOT in trouble. we might be, and large percentages of other life on the planet might be. but the planet WILL BE FINE.
Stretching from about 66-34 million years ago, the Paleocene and Eocene were the first geologic epochs following the end of the Mesozoic Era. (The Mesozoic—the age of dinosaurs—was itself an era punctuated by "hothouse" conditions.) Geologists and paleontologists think that during much of the Paleocene and early Eocene, the poles were free of ice caps, and palm trees and crocodiles lived above the Arctic Circle. The transition between the two epochs around 56 million years ago was marked by a rapid spike in global temperature.
hmm, extreme temperatures, much hotter than now, no ice caps. tropical conditions in the arctic circle, and the planet was fine, life recovered, even flourished.
stop claiming we're destroying the planet, we quite blatantly AREN'T. we destroying ourselves, and most of what's living alongside us.
if we succeed, the planet will continue. the effects of what we've done will dissipate and life will flourish again. it'll just be another small blip in the planets history for future inhabitants to ponder and puzzle over.
Global warming is saving the planet
A rise in temperature here means people won't need to go to Benidorm = Less planes in the sky
stop claiming we're destroying the planet, we quite blatantly AREN'T. we destroying ourselves, and most of what's living alongside us.
===============================
You are conflating two completely different issues.
What people are protesting about is the current rise in global temperature due to external forcing which has become apparent over the last 50 years.
This external foracing of global temperature change is due almost entirely to co2 and green house gases emitted due to human activity.
What you are talking about is a completely different subject.
Of course there will be other global events due to things like axial tilt, or internal forcing, that's not really what the argument is about.
We are currently destroying the earth as we know it, and our ability to sustain ourselves on it, at a faster pace than is necessary, as we have the technology and capability to do something about it.
Obviously we all understand that when this phase of human habitation of this planet is over, the planet will still exist, but that's an entirely different issue to what these people in London are talking about.
There are plenty of floating rocks in space that may have previously sustained life, so what makes this planet what it is, is it's ability to do just that.
So to say just because we might speed up the destruction of mankind, and every living organism on the planet, we aren't destroying earth, is just plain wrong.
So to say just because we might speed up the destruction of mankind, and every living organism on the planet, we aren't destroying earth, is just plain wrong.
no, it's quite patently RIGHT. for a start, we can't destroy every living organism on earth. a lot of them, yes, all of them, NO. life is astoundingly resilient. it finds ways to survive, scientists have found viruses and bacteria frozen in ice for millennia that can still reactivate and replicate. scientists now know that such life can survive the vacuum of space, an inherently more hostile environment than anything we could possibly create, whatever we do, the earth will survive, and life will re-assert itself, so no, we are not destroying the earth. we are destroying ourselves. that is something completely different.
I've not once claimed we're not risking our own existence. but you see it all over the news, protestors with banners proclaiming that we need to 'save our planet'.
our planet IS NOT at risk.
if these protesters can't even get their semantics right, then i'm not holding out any hope on them getting their science right, I think I'll leave that to actual climatalogical scientists, not a neo-pagan who became an activist as a direct result of taking huge doses of two powerful psychedelic drugs
If you fancy a laugh sign up to their volunteer group on Facebook (XR Volunteers)... they are actively volunteering themselves to get arrested so they can get their pink boat back
The media do a good job at distracting the public from what is a serious issue by focusing on the people protesting, clearly. Funded by the fossil fuel companies no doubt
I suggest that everybody watches the climate change documentary by David Attenborough on the BBC. It's a serious situation we're in, but people would rather be in denial and not change the way they live. Easier that way, especially for older folks who don't have to deal with the consequences
The media do a good job at distracting the public from what is a serious issue by focusing on the people protesting, clearly. Funded by the fossil fuel companies no doubt
———————-//
You need to take your foil hat off 👍
Thing is, unless the likes of China, India and the US start falling in line with the rest of the developed world, everything else being done is a drop in the ocean, like fighting a forest fire with a single hosepipe.
if these protesters can't even get their semantics right, then i'm not holding out any hope on them getting their science right,
----------
"save our planet" is a purely a slogan to show the severity of the situation. It seems a bit silly to argue over the semantics and criticise anyone who uses it given what they're protesting about.
A 60% wiping out of all wildlife on Earth in just 40 years is catastrophic (mostly whilst we've been in the EU BTW). Insects will be gone in 100 years and then it's game over for humans. Climate change is just a small part and I support all of their actions even if they disrupt people going to work although some businesses are unlucky. What else can be done if politicians are under the influence of greedy and irresponsible capitalist global corporations?
comment by Analog (U17200)
posted 16 hours, 36 minutes ago
The media do a good job at distracting the public from what is a serious issue by focusing on the people protesting, clearly. Funded by the fossil fuel companies no doubt
I suggest that everybody watches the climate change documentary by David Attenborough on the BBC. It's a serious situation we're in, but people would rather be in denial and not change the way they live. Easier that way, especially for older folks who don't have to deal with the consequences
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes, these media corporations bring us the programmes showing catastrophe and yet appear to be against the protesters. That's because they are part of the problem, being anti-Brexit, funded by big business. We need a revolution quite soon.
Sign in if you want to comment
Extinction Rebellion
Page 2 of 2
posted on 19/4/19
comment by Terminator1 (U1863)
posted 9 minutes ago
comment by jlou1978 (U15376)
posted 10 minutes ago
comment by 19th title coming soon. (U12879)
posted 1 hour, 22 minutes ago
yeah, let's protest about climate change in the middle of London, bringing all that traffic to a standstill.
cos all those stationary cars belching out co2 is just so great for the environment.
bloody stupid hypocritical tw@ts the lot of them.
and not one single one of them is 'saving the earth'. the earth has been much hotter than this, with higher co2 levels, many times before now. and will be again. the earth will be fine. it'll recover and continue it's cyclical processes just as it has before.
i'm not a climate change denier, i'm not disagreeing we're now having an adverse affect on the climate. just the scale of the outcome.
we might save ourselves, and some other species, till the next hot age, or the next ice age, and then the cycle will repeat.
anyone who thinks we can either 'save' or 'destroy' the planet has an overinflated sense of mankinds importance or abilities.
want to save mankind, and ensure there's enough resources for everyone? simple. kill 75% of the human population and then enact a strictly enforced 1 child born per adult policy. problem solved in perpetuity.
any protester unwilling to do that is an hypocrite.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What a load of total b0ll0x.🤣🤣🤣
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So what was the cause of the last dramatic increase in global temperatures? Cavemen flying jumbo jets?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
sunspots
posted on 19/4/19
comment by Terminator1 (U1863)
posted 28 minutes ago
comment by jlou1978 (U15376)
posted 10 minutes ago
comment by 19th title coming soon. (U12879)
posted 1 hour, 22 minutes ago
yeah, let's protest about climate change in the middle of London, bringing all that traffic to a standstill.
cos all those stationary cars belching out co2 is just so great for the environment.
bloody stupid hypocritical tw@ts the lot of them.
and not one single one of them is 'saving the earth'. the earth has been much hotter than this, with higher co2 levels, many times before now. and will be again. the earth will be fine. it'll recover and continue it's cyclical processes just as it has before.
i'm not a climate change denier, i'm not disagreeing we're now having an adverse affect on the climate. just the scale of the outcome.
we might save ourselves, and some other species, till the next hot age, or the next ice age, and then the cycle will repeat.
anyone who thinks we can either 'save' or 'destroy' the planet has an overinflated sense of mankinds importance or abilities.
want to save mankind, and ensure there's enough resources for everyone? simple. kill 75% of the human population and then enact a strictly enforced 1 child born per adult policy. problem solved in perpetuity.
any protester unwilling to do that is an hypocrite.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What a load of total b0ll0x.🤣🤣🤣
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So what was the cause of the last dramatic increase in global temperatures? Cavemen flying jumbo jets?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ancient Aliens racing round the skies with their then primitive combustible fuel based flying dragons.
posted on 19/4/19
Or inconsiderate dinosaurs farting methane into the atmosphere.
posted on 19/4/19
comment by Terminator1 (U1863)
posted 9 minutes ago
comment by jlou1978 (U15376)
posted 10 minutes ago
comment by 19th title coming soon. (U12879)
posted 1 hour, 22 minutes ago
yeah, let's protest about climate change in the middle of London, bringing all that traffic to a standstill.
cos all those stationary cars belching out co2 is just so great for the environment.
bloody stupid hypocritical tw@ts the lot of them.
and not one single one of them is 'saving the earth'. the earth has been much hotter than this, with higher co2 levels, many times before now. and will be again. the earth will be fine. it'll recover and continue it's cyclical processes just as it has before.
i'm not a climate change denier, i'm not disagreeing we're now having an adverse affect on the climate. just the scale of the outcome.
we might save ourselves, and some other species, till the next hot age, or the next ice age, and then the cycle will repeat.
anyone who thinks we can either 'save' or 'destroy' the planet has an overinflated sense of mankinds importance or abilities.
want to save mankind, and ensure there's enough resources for everyone? simple. kill 75% of the human population and then enact a strictly enforced 1 child born per adult policy. problem solved in perpetuity.
any protester unwilling to do that is an hypocrite.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What a load of total b0ll0x.🤣🤣🤣
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So what was the cause of the last dramatic increase in global temperatures? Cavemen flying jumbo jets?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We are talking about direct external impact over the last 50 years, which have been more impactful than previous millenier in terms of rising temperature.
You are talking about a completely different issue.
posted on 19/4/19
by 19th title coming soon. (U12879)
posted 2 hours, 43 minutes ago
yeah, let's protest about climate change in the middle of London, bringing all that traffic to a standstill.
cos all those stationary cars belching out co2 is just so great for the environment.
bloody stupid hypocritical tw@ts the lot of them.
and not one single one of them is 'saving the earth'. the earth has been much hotter than this, with higher co2 levels, many times before now. and will be again. the earth will be fine. it'll recover and continue it's cyclical processes just as it has before.
i'm not a climate change denier, i'm not disagreeing we're now having an adverse affect on the climate. just the scale of the outcome.
we might save ourselves, and some other species, till the next hot age, or the next ice age, and then the cycle will repeat.
anyone who thinks we can either 'save' or 'destroy' the planet has an overinflated sense of mankinds importance or abilities.
want to save mankind, and ensure there's enough resources for everyone? simple. kill 75% of the human population and then enact a strictly enforced 1 child born per adult policy. problem solved in perpetuity.
any protester unwilling to do that is an hypocrite.
____________________________________
I really hope you don't believe that nonsense.
The planet is in trouble, the seas, the air, and the land, which doesn't leave much else.
There are a lot of hypocrites on both sides, but it doesn't change what is happening.
I try to listen to people who do know, because I don't know it myself.
But when Sir David Attenborough tells me it's happening I tend to trust him.
When Donald Trump says it's not my trust is a little less.
posted on 19/4/19
hope I don't believe what? that we're causing problems? nowhere in my post have I denied we're causing problems.
do I believe we're risking the lives of most of the live on the planet, yes.
do I believe we're destroying the planet. no. not even close.
it's sheer arrogance to think we're even close to having that sort of power.
the planet is NOT in trouble. we might be, and large percentages of other life on the planet might be. but the planet WILL BE FINE.
Stretching from about 66-34 million years ago, the Paleocene and Eocene were the first geologic epochs following the end of the Mesozoic Era. (The Mesozoic—the age of dinosaurs—was itself an era punctuated by "hothouse" conditions.) Geologists and paleontologists think that during much of the Paleocene and early Eocene, the poles were free of ice caps, and palm trees and crocodiles lived above the Arctic Circle. The transition between the two epochs around 56 million years ago was marked by a rapid spike in global temperature.
hmm, extreme temperatures, much hotter than now, no ice caps. tropical conditions in the arctic circle, and the planet was fine, life recovered, even flourished.
stop claiming we're destroying the planet, we quite blatantly AREN'T. we destroying ourselves, and most of what's living alongside us.
if we succeed, the planet will continue. the effects of what we've done will dissipate and life will flourish again. it'll just be another small blip in the planets history for future inhabitants to ponder and puzzle over.
posted on 19/4/19
Global warming is saving the planet
A rise in temperature here means people won't need to go to Benidorm = Less planes in the sky
posted on 19/4/19
stop claiming we're destroying the planet, we quite blatantly AREN'T. we destroying ourselves, and most of what's living alongside us.
===============================
You are conflating two completely different issues.
What people are protesting about is the current rise in global temperature due to external forcing which has become apparent over the last 50 years.
This external foracing of global temperature change is due almost entirely to co2 and green house gases emitted due to human activity.
What you are talking about is a completely different subject.
Of course there will be other global events due to things like axial tilt, or internal forcing, that's not really what the argument is about.
We are currently destroying the earth as we know it, and our ability to sustain ourselves on it, at a faster pace than is necessary, as we have the technology and capability to do something about it.
Obviously we all understand that when this phase of human habitation of this planet is over, the planet will still exist, but that's an entirely different issue to what these people in London are talking about.
There are plenty of floating rocks in space that may have previously sustained life, so what makes this planet what it is, is it's ability to do just that.
So to say just because we might speed up the destruction of mankind, and every living organism on the planet, we aren't destroying earth, is just plain wrong.
posted on 19/4/19
So to say just because we might speed up the destruction of mankind, and every living organism on the planet, we aren't destroying earth, is just plain wrong.
no, it's quite patently RIGHT. for a start, we can't destroy every living organism on earth. a lot of them, yes, all of them, NO. life is astoundingly resilient. it finds ways to survive, scientists have found viruses and bacteria frozen in ice for millennia that can still reactivate and replicate. scientists now know that such life can survive the vacuum of space, an inherently more hostile environment than anything we could possibly create, whatever we do, the earth will survive, and life will re-assert itself, so no, we are not destroying the earth. we are destroying ourselves. that is something completely different.
I've not once claimed we're not risking our own existence. but you see it all over the news, protestors with banners proclaiming that we need to 'save our planet'.
our planet IS NOT at risk.
if these protesters can't even get their semantics right, then i'm not holding out any hope on them getting their science right, I think I'll leave that to actual climatalogical scientists, not a neo-pagan who became an activist as a direct result of taking huge doses of two powerful psychedelic drugs
posted on 19/4/19
If you fancy a laugh sign up to their volunteer group on Facebook (XR Volunteers)... they are actively volunteering themselves to get arrested so they can get their pink boat back
posted on 19/4/19
The media do a good job at distracting the public from what is a serious issue by focusing on the people protesting, clearly. Funded by the fossil fuel companies no doubt
I suggest that everybody watches the climate change documentary by David Attenborough on the BBC. It's a serious situation we're in, but people would rather be in denial and not change the way they live. Easier that way, especially for older folks who don't have to deal with the consequences
posted on 19/4/19
The media do a good job at distracting the public from what is a serious issue by focusing on the people protesting, clearly. Funded by the fossil fuel companies no doubt
———————-//
You need to take your foil hat off 👍
posted on 19/4/19
Thing is, unless the likes of China, India and the US start falling in line with the rest of the developed world, everything else being done is a drop in the ocean, like fighting a forest fire with a single hosepipe.
posted on 19/4/19
if these protesters can't even get their semantics right, then i'm not holding out any hope on them getting their science right,
----------
"save our planet" is a purely a slogan to show the severity of the situation. It seems a bit silly to argue over the semantics and criticise anyone who uses it given what they're protesting about.
posted on 20/4/19
A 60% wiping out of all wildlife on Earth in just 40 years is catastrophic (mostly whilst we've been in the EU BTW). Insects will be gone in 100 years and then it's game over for humans. Climate change is just a small part and I support all of their actions even if they disrupt people going to work although some businesses are unlucky. What else can be done if politicians are under the influence of greedy and irresponsible capitalist global corporations?
posted on 20/4/19
comment by Analog (U17200)
posted 16 hours, 36 minutes ago
The media do a good job at distracting the public from what is a serious issue by focusing on the people protesting, clearly. Funded by the fossil fuel companies no doubt
I suggest that everybody watches the climate change documentary by David Attenborough on the BBC. It's a serious situation we're in, but people would rather be in denial and not change the way they live. Easier that way, especially for older folks who don't have to deal with the consequences
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes, these media corporations bring us the programmes showing catastrophe and yet appear to be against the protesters. That's because they are part of the problem, being anti-Brexit, funded by big business. We need a revolution quite soon.
Page 2 of 2